Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto return as the infamous Kirk and Spock in the next chapter of the rebooted franchise. SIDEWALKS’ Richard has take on “Star Trek Into Darkness.”
STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Directed by: J.J. Abrams
Cast: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Bendict Cumberbatch, Alice Eve, John Cho, Simon Pegg, Karl Urban
Rating: PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence
Studio Synopsis:
When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis. With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction. As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.
Richard’s Take:
I have to say I am a longtime “Star Trek” fan. I grew up with the original series that starred William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley. I have seen all the big screen films, as well as all the TV follow-ups – “the Animated Series,” “The Next Generation,” “Deep Space Nine,” “Voyager,” and “Enterprise.” So, viewing the 2009 reboot and the current sequel, “Into Darkness,” must have been like leaving me on the planet Risa (the pleasure planet that Starfleet crews went to for R&R). Well, yes and no.
Four years ago, director J.J. Abrams and his team of writers and producers made the best decision to make the film series their own by retelling and destroying the linear timeline of the “Trek” universe with backward time traveling. Now, they could do anything they want. They also brought in more action for the characters than what was previously shown on the small and big screens. With this sequel, they tripled that action quota.
“Star Trek Into Darkness” is a roller coaster ride of non-stop, warp speed conflict and heart pulsing intense scenes that include attempting to save Spock from an exploding volcano, bullet-like flying between starships in space suits and battling the Federation’s arch enemy The Klingons. When you view the film, besides being out of breath, it’s like watching another big budgeted “Transformers,” the recent “The A-Team,” and even “Star Wars – Episodes 1, 2 and 3,”where action and CGI rule the silver screen.
While this generation likes this action-type of filmmaking (i.e. look at the box office and popularity), I have to admit I’m somewhat a little disappointed – because it’s all flash. The explosive action sequences over takes the film, which is not necessary when you have a richness of well drawn characters to work with, due to the previous established series. “Star Trek” was more than starship battles and fist fights. I tried to imagine whether Shatner, Nimoy, and their NCC—1701 crew could ever to do this type of story and action in this current style of filmmaking. It would definitely be “no,” because their stories were more on character development and dramatic situations with a touch of action. Even though it was pretty much NASCAR® racing in every frame, “Into Darkness” isn’t that bad. Far from it. I think it’s actually one of the better entries in the history of twelve movies, ranking just below “The Wrath of Khan” and “The Voyage Home” and above “First Contact.”
While the special effects and action are so prominent, there is a story there: about a terrorist (Benedict Cumberbatch) that the Federation – with the help of Kirk and company — must stop. It’s hard to explain the plot of the film within this review because I don’t want to reveal the top secret storyline (in case you haven’t seen the film) and the potential surprise. On the other hand, the writers — Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, and Damon Lindelof — did make a solid attempt to paid tribute to an early chapter of the original film series with an almost scene by scene scenario with an interesting and cute role reversal. Additionally, the scribes tried to bring in some of the chemistry and wit of the original “three musketeers” of Kirk, Spock and McCoy, but, sadly, they still pale in comparison to the 60’s counterparts.
The entire crew returns – headlined by Chris Pine as Captain James T. Kirk and Zachary Quinto as Mr.Spock – along with a new crew member Dr. Carol Marcus (Alice Eve), a character previously introduced on “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.” I enjoyed the somewhat forced interaction between this version of Pine’s Kirk and Quinto’s Spock (Shatner and Nimoy were and still the best in my opinion), although the pointy ear alien shows more emotion than Nimoy did in the TV series, which I feel is still uncharacteristic for an emotionless-trained Vulcan. OK, I’m nit-picking. As for the crew, Scotty (Simon Pegg) gets a slightly larger part (and a lot of exercise running around), while Uhura (Zoe Saldana) and Chekhov (Anton Yelchin) have some moments to shine. Dr. McCoy (Karl Urban) is around, but is really underused, as well as Sulu (John Cho), who is pretty much keeping the captain’s chair warm. Eve, who has a reason to be on board The Enterprise, is pretty much eye candy. Even though they already had Saldana for that beauty role, I guess more is better – of course, I’m not complaining. It would be nice to create stories for the supporting characters in future films to break the mold of just Kirk and Spock storylines.
Cumberatch (also known as TV’s “Sherlock Holmes”) is really the breakout star of “Into Darkness.” He is smooth, mysterious, and sinister that makes him one of the strongest villains (similar to the style of Heath Ledger as The Joker in “The Dark Knight”) in the “Star Trek” universe, next, of course, to Khan (the late and great Ricardo Montalbán) and The Borg. I really enjoyed his performance and he is the highlight. Wasted in the film were Peter Weller as Starfleet Admiral Alexander Marcus and Bruce Greenwood as Rear Admiral Christopher Pike. Greenwood, who should have been a larger star and is underrated, shines in his selected scenes, and I wished he had more screen time. Weller is simply there; the former “Robocop” could have been used more.
In many ways, if there were no previous TV shows and movies to compare it with, the sequel would be considered better than the reboot. Just like “The Empire Strikes Back” was a strong sequel following “Star Wars.” All-in-all, “Star Trek Into Darkness” is a worthy vehicle in the new “Star Trek” universe. Just wildly on Red Bull and Five Hour Energy. I will always love the Shatner version, but I need to stop complaining and enjoy having any kind of “Trek” in your life. Live long and prosper.